Compliance evidence for manufacturing and industry on Azure
NIS2 brings industrial operators into scope.
The regulatory driver
NIS2 classifies large parts of manufacturing as important entities, with obligations covering risk management, supply chain security, and incident reporting within tight deadlines.
Most industrial IT teams inherited a cloud estate before these obligations existed. The first task is knowing what state it is actually in.
What Equalis OpsReg shows you
- ✓82 NIS2 rules evaluated across your Azure estate
- ✓Supply chain and third-party exposure surfaced at resource level
- ✓Incident readiness evidence: logging, alerting and retention posture
- ✓Board-ready reporting, since management bodies carry personal liability
What exposure looks like
NIS2 classifies large parts of manufacturing as important entities. Article 34 sets administrative fines of at least 7 million euros or 1.4 percent of total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher.
The percentage is calculated on group turnover, not the local entity, so a subsidiary of a large parent carries the parent's exposure.
Article 20 makes management bodies personally accountable, and Member States may impose temporary bans on individuals exercising managerial functions.
Supply chain security is an explicit obligation, which means your customers will ask you for the same evidence your regulator does.
Why generic tooling falls short here
Lowest common denominator
Tools covering three clouds cover the intersection of three clouds. If you are entirely on Azure you are paying for breadth you do not use and losing depth you do need.
IT and OT are not one estate
Corporate and operational subscriptions answer to different obligations. Evidence that blends them proves nothing about either.
Board reporting
Personal accountability under Article 20 means the output has to be readable by people who do not administer Azure.